On 2/28/10 3:04 AM, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote: > IMHO the time to change anything in CBFS is over. It is too widely used > to change the in-ROM format in a way that is not 100% backwards > compatible. Your patch might be backwards compatible, but some of the > proposed extensions (option ROM naming and separate PCI ID storage) are not. > There is no way to do partly flash updates of CBFS _or_ LAR formatted coreboot images, so how widely is used just does not really matter. At this time a flash update always updates the complete coreboot image. Until that changes, we don't break anything.
> OTOH, if we change the in-ROM format, we might as well fix the design > shortcomings I mentioned back in the LAR+SELF debate. AFAIK modern CBFS > still is a stripped down LAR+SELF. > What's missing in your opinion? Stefan -- coreboot mailing list: [email protected] http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
